program outcomes - monterey county, californiamcdss.co.monterey.ca.us/families/downloads/p2s...
TRANSCRIPT
Program Outcomes April 1, 2011 –March 31, 2012
The Pathways to Safety contracted agencies and staff who spent an enormous amount of time and effort working with these families and documenting the results of those efforts.
The Family and Children’s Services social workers and staff who worked closely with the ACTION Council to deliver quality services to families in need.
The staff members of the ACTION Council, Door to Hope, and Alisal Family Resource Center.
Design support provided by Your Social Marketer, Inc.
Data and statistics support provided by Arthur Lomboy.
Evaluation support provided by David Dobrowski.
Development, research, and evaluation provided by Daniel Bach and Larry Imwalle.
Acknowledgements
I. Introduction/Methodology……………………………………………………..page 1
II. Referral and Demographic Information……………………………………..page 6
III. Community Assignments ……………………………………………………page 12
IV. Engagement……………………………………………………………….…..page 13
V. Assessment Information……………………………………………………...page 14
VI. Recurrence……………………………………………………………………page 21
VII. Satisfaction Survey ………………………………………………………….page 27
VIII. Personal Perspectives …………………………………………….……….page 28
IX. Glossary …………………………………………………………………...…page 30
Table of Contents
Pathways to Safety
Dear Community Member,
The Pathways to Safety team is pleased to present our 5th Annual Program Outcomes Report to the community. Since we started five years ago, we’ve been able to offer this early intervention focused approach to child welfare to over 6,000 families–and approximately 1,400 have voluntarily participated in intensive case management services. We also reached another important milestone in the evolution of Differential Response in Child Welfare when we launched Path 3 services in July 2011. This marked the full rollout of Pathways to Safety, and means that now every call that comes into the child abuse and neglect hotline is considered for a community based response through Pathways to Safety. In this regard, Monterey County continues to be on the leading edge of implementing Differential Response programming in California. That is an accomplishment everyone who has ever been involved with Pathways to Safety should celebrate. It is through our collective effort that we’ve been able to improve the lives of children and youth, and strengthen families across Monterey County.
As you read through this report we hope that you will get a sense of the size, scope of our efforts, as well the characteristics and experiences of the children and families we’ve been able to serve. Some of the key program outcomes for the 2011-2012 program year include:
• 1,401families had the opportunity to participate in family support and case management services through Monterey County’s differential response system, and over 73% of these families had a face-to-face follow-up contact.
1.
2.
• 25% of all families referred to Pathways to Safety (Paths 1,2,3) voluntarily engaged in intensive case management services. Path 3 cases, newly implemented this year, exhibited the highest level of engagement at 56%.
• 61% of families that completed the 90-day program showed measurable improvement on formal assessments. The largest improvements were seen in the parenting capabilities (36%), family interactions (33%) and child well-being (32%) domains.
As we move into the 2012-2013 program year we have more exciting developments to share. The ACTION Council has agreed to continue to partner with Monterey County Department of Social & Employment Services Family & Children Services Division to coordinate the community-based response of Pathways to Safety for three more years. This decision will allow for continuity in program design and delivery as we enter into a 3- year formal evaluation study of Pathways to Safety that will be carried out by an independent evaluator. Now that the Pathways to Safety model has been fully developed and strong performance management systems are in place, we feel well positioned to demonstrate through evidence what we already know through practice. That is, our approach to differential response is cost-effective, successful in keeping kids safe and out of the child welfare system, and serves as a model for other communities to emulate.
Larry Imwalle,ACTION Council of Monterey County
Pathways to Safety –our way of doing business!
Pathways to Safety is based on two core beliefs – that families can
resolve issues more successfully when they voluntarily engage in
services, supports and solutions; and that children are safer and families stronger when communities work
together.
How it begins….
A referral to Pathways to Safety begins with a call to Family and Children’s Services (Child Welfare). If the legal threshold for abuse and neglect that would allow for an Immediate Child Welfare Response is not met, families are “Evaluated Out” or marked as a “10-Day” for follow-up by a social worker.
These families can be referred to Pathways to Safety and offered support and services to address the problems that may have triggered the call to Family and Children’s Services in the first place. Depending on each situation and the level of concern, families are either directly referred to community- based Family Resource Center (Evaluated Out, Path 1), jointly approached by a Family Resource Specialist and Family and Children’s Services (10-Day Follow-up, Path 2) or referred by the social worker after assessment (Immediate, Path 3). In Program Year 11-12, 762 families were reviewed for Path 1, 1083 families were reviewed for Path 2 and 466 were reviewed for Path 3.
Note: Reasons why a family may not be referred to Pathways to Safety include that Child Welfare cannot locate the family; the family lives outside of Monterey County or on federal land; the incident was an accidental injury; or the child/children maybe opened as a case or already represent an open case in the child welfare system. In addition, for part of the past year Path 3 was only implemented a limited amount of time.
4.
Overview of Evaluation Methodology
The data presented in this report reflect Pathways to Safety Year 5 program data, covering the period from April 1, 2011 through March 31, 2012. The source data for this reports comes from two primary sources of information: CMS/CWS and ETO.
CWS/CMS is the child welfare case management system. It is the source for the information on the number of child abuse referrals, and the demographic characteristics of the child welfare population.
ETO (Efforts to Outcomes) is the Pathways to Safety community case management database that contains the intake and assessment data collection through the community based response. This includes the initial intake, case plans, pre/post family assessments (FAST), and family support funds requests.
In order to produce this report, a matched dataset of ETO and CWS/CMS data was created and this set is the source of all information in this report.
•It must be noted that as this initiative has developed the amount and quality of data has improved, allowing us to ask more and more questions. In the following pages you will review demographics, summary data and some comparative evaluation data. It is our goal to continue to provide an expanded base of reliable information on program performance.
-The Evaluation Team-
Members of the Pathways to Safety Evaluation Team:Daniel Bach, Larry Imwalle, Arthur Lomboy, David Dobrowski.
5.
In Program Year 2011-2012, 2311 families representing 3043 children were reviewed for Pathways to Safety.
Chart 1.
491 families
271 families
762 families
230 families
853families
466 families
287 children
292 children
1223 children1515 children
875 children
588 children
653 children 73 children
580 children
57 families
409 families
1083 families
6.
Demographic Information
GenderChart 2 represents the gender breakdown for all children represented in the referrals reported during the program year. The data shows that females were referred at a slightly lower number than males.
Age GroupsChart 3 represents the age group breakdown for all children represented in the referrals reported during the program year, with children 6-10 as the largest reported age group.
7.
Chart 2.
Chart 3.
EthnicityChart 4 represents the ethnicity breakdown for all children represented in the referrals reported during the program year.
8.
Chart 4.
Referrals by Zip Code
Chart 5.
9.
Evaluated Out AllegationsChart 6 represents the Allegations for referrals referred into Path 1 during the program year.
10 Day AllegationsChart 7 represents the Allegations for referrals referred into Path 2 during the program year.
10.
Chart 6.
Chart 7.
Immediate AllegationsChart 8 represents the Allegations for referrals referred into Path 3 during the program year.
11.
Chart 8.
Pathways to Safety Assignments by Community Partner Agency
Chart 9.
132 439 32
220 12
283 283 5
1 1 8
12.
(3)
(4)
(3)
(8)
(17)
(14)
Declined Service 233Stabilized 225Other 165Unable to Locate 221No Cooperation 108Referred to CPS 43Re-Referral 2Open case 7Missing 339
Engagement: Chart 10.
13.
Completed Assessments (Path 1)Chart 11 represents the assessments completed for families referred on Path 1.
Completed Assessments (Path 2 &3)Chart 12 represents the assessments completed for families referred for Path 2 or 3.
Chart 11.
Chart 12.
14.
Identified NeedsChart 13 represents the actual number of identified need by family reported during the program year.
15.
Chart 13.
170
147
60
3429
2229
1548
1314
11
15
136
1414
20
89
57
12
Parental Capabilities Child Well Being Self SufficiencyFamily Health Family Safety Family InteractionsSocial/Community Life Environment
37%
22%
10%8%
5%7%
2%
9%
Goal Domain
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
Overall Case Plan GoalsChart 14 represents the assessments completed for families referred on Path 1.
Case Plan Goals by PathChart 15 represents the assessments completed for families referred by Path.
Chart 14.
Chart 15.
17.
Intake Exit
0.27
0.36
0.59
0.22
0.48
0.12 0.11
0.41
0.68
0.74
0.79
0.62
0.78
0.55
0.32
0.57
ChildWell-Being
Environment Family Health FamilyInteractions
Family Safety ParentalCapabilities
Self-Sufficiency Social-Community Life
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
NCFAS-G (FAST) Intake/Exit comparison by DomainChart 16 represents the mean scores at intake and exit by domain, for all families with completed intake & exit assessments.
18.
Chart 16.
32.430.0
18.2
33.2
25.1
35.6
19.4
15.0
Child Well-Being
Environment Family Health FamilyInteractions
Family Safety ParentalCapabilities
Self-Sufficiency Social-Community Life
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
NCFAS-G (FAST) Overall Improvement by DomainChart 17 represents the percent of all families with completed intake & exit assessments that showedimprovement, by domain.
19.
Chart 17.
Support FundsChart 18 represents the funds spent by category to support families during the program year.
20.
Chart 18.
This chart provides information on the number of referrals that were re-referred within the time frame of greater than 90 days but less than 180 days. Data is broken out by those evaluated out referrals that were not assigned to Pathways and those that were placed in Path 1. From the point of re-entry the chart then shows the new determined response ( Evaluated Out, 10-Day, or Immediate) and disposition (Unfounded, Unsubstantiated or Substantiated) of the referrals. The disposition numbers reported are for those referrals that were investigated.
Program Year Recurrence Path 1
Chart 19.
Substantiated:(0)
Substantiated:(0)
(3)
(2)
(0)
(2)
(7)
(2)
Number of re-referrals for families that were not referred to Pathways to Safety (Path 1):
Number of re-referrals for families referred to Pathways to Safety (Path 1):
21.
This chart provides information on the number of referrals that were re-referred within the time frame of greater than 90 days but less than 180 days. Data is broken out by those evaluated out referrals that were not assigned to Pathways and those that were placed in Path 2. From the point of re-entry the chart then shows the new determined response ( Evaluated Out, 10-Day, or Immediate) and disposition (Unfounded, Unsubstantiated or Substantiated) of the referrals. The disposition numbers reported are for those referrals that were investigated.
Program Year Recurrence Path 2
Chart 20.
Substantiated:(1)
Substantiated:(6)
(1)
(5)
(1)
(8)
(13)
(9)
Number of re-referrals for families that were not referred to Pathways to Safety (Path 2):
Number of re-referrals for families referred to Pathways to Safety (Path 2):
22.
This chart provides information on the number of referrals that were re-referred within the time frame of greater than 90 days but less than 180 days. Data is broken out by those evaluated out referrals that were not assigned to Pathways and those that were placed in Path 3. From the point of re-entry the chart then shows the new determined response ( Evaluated Out, 10-Day, or Immediate) and disposition (Unfounded, Unsubstantiated or Substantiated) of the referrals. The disposition numbers reported are for those referrals that were investigated.
Program Year Recurrence Path 3
Chart 21.
Substantiated:(3)
Substantiated:(0)
(3)
(6)
(7)
(0)
(0)
(0)
Number of re-referrals for families that were not referred to Pathways to Safety (Path 3):
Number of re-referrals for families referred to Pathways to Safety (Path 3):
23.
Recurrence Over Time
Chart 22-1.
2,729
519
1,343
347
520
16 3 183 173
116 125 108
197 224 163
156 181 180
1,862
867
2,7571,978
779
28 % 63
40% 50
30% 77
38% 41
2003/04
2004/05 584
1,394
296
483
* In order to maintain the methodology behind recurrence, re-referral rates may be adjusted for a period not exceeding 3 years post close of the program year .
24.
1716
9112,627
468
1248
292
619
27% 43
32% 26
26% 24
30% 34
24% 34
30% 37
21% 17
22% 29
149 153 166
109 96 87
73 108 90
112 113 98
97 114 67
125 122 99
46 67 47
93 92 57
2007/08
1059
10862,145
271
788
323
7632008/09
773
1093
1866160
613
242
851
2010/11
278
868
346
804
1146
11502009/102,302
Chart 22-2.
25.
Recurrence Over Time (Path 3)
Recurrence for Path 3 is currently in development. To maintain the methodology, the evaluation team will review the numbers in the following years report. Baseline data is listed below:
Baseline Year
03-04 was 34% with 21 substantiations.
04-05 was 26% with 22 substantiations.
Program Year without Path 3
07-08 was 28% with 16 substantiations.
08-09 was 28% with 18 substantiations.
09-10 was 28% with 10 substantiations.
10-11 was 28% with 28 substantiations.
26.
Exit SurveysChart 23 Voluntary telephone surveys were conducted with families that completed services before March 31, 2012.
27.
Chart 23.
“This will be my 5th year as a Family Resource Specialist with Pathways to Safety. During these 5 years I’ve had the opportunity to work closely with Social Workers from all three Emergency Response units. We have learned from each other and continue to work as a team. I enjoy getting to know a family. Some families need someone who will take the time listen to them and help guide them to the resources that can improve their family situation. It could be assistance with basic needs or referral to counseling or parenting classes. It’s rewarding to see them succeed after being in the program. I feel Pathways to Safety has made a positive impact with families in our community. I continue to run into families who have completed the program and are doing well.”
Rhonda Warren Family Resource SpecialistPathways to Safety
28.
“Pathways to Safety has provided to my family different alternatives to strengthen our marriage with counseling options and offer other partnership programs to help us understand and learn about the growth of my eleven year old son and my eight month old daughter. It’s nice to know that the there is help for families that are going through hardships and Pathways to Safety has demonstrated the concern in helping us to maintain our family in harmony for the wellbeing of our children. Pathways to Safety provided my family with diapers, wipes, a baby blanket and a sweater for my daughter.”
Fatima Vasquez
29.
30.
EO - Child Welfare Response Code - Evaluated out
ETO - Efforts to Outcomes, the case management system for Pathways to Safety
FAST - Nickname for North Carolina Family Assessment Scale, General
FRS - Family Resource Specialist
Goal Domains - 8 areas of focus within the FAST Assessment
IMD – Immediate or 24 hour response
P2S - Pathways to Safety
Path 1 - Evaluated out referrals entering Pathways to Safety
Path 2 - 10 day referrals entering Pathways to Safety
Path 3 – 24 hour referrals entering Pathways to Safety
Program Year - Defined as April 1 to March 31
Re-referral - A referral that comes back to CPS
SAS - Statistical Analysis Software
10-Day - Child Welfare Response Code
ACMC - ACTION Council of Monterey County
Allegations - Categories of reported concerns as defined by Welfare and Institutions Code
Assessments - Data collection and performance tracking forms used by Pathways to Safety
Child Welfare Response - Categories of response time as defined by Welfare and Institutions Code
CWS/CMS - Case management system used by child welfare
Disposition - Categories of referral resolution as defined by Welfare and Institutions Code
DR - Differential Response
DSES - Department of Social and Employment Services
Engagement - Those families who received an intake and initial FAST
Enrollments - Those families referred to Pathways to Safety
Glossary of Acronyms
For more Information contact:
Family and Children’s ServicesDaniel Bach
(831) [email protected]
The ACTION Council of Monterey CountyLarry Imwalle
(831) [email protected]
31.